Is there--could there ever be--anything new in nude photography?

By the way, Lannie, I want to be clear. I very much respect how open you are to where these threads go. I know you don't

have an agenda as to where other people go with the ideas. I was just noticing that you, yourself, took it to the decency

place. I found the newness issue you started with more interesting.

<blockquote>

<p>I was just noticing that you, yourself, took it to the decency place.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I don't have a "decency place," Fred. I only want to express what is authentically human vis-a-vis the nude, as in all things. What that entails is completely open for discussion, as far as I am concerned.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Now, if we are going to try to analyze the nude in terms of what is erotic, then we might need to understand the kind of an applied technology to be used--if we understand in the first place what makes a photo erotic and thus sexually pleasing/interesting to look at in the first place.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That Youtube analysis of the female pelvis seems not the way to define eroticism in the female figure and seems more like a confusion between correct anatomy verses posture of the subject which requires seeing the arch of the spine in relation to the legs and upper torso. The human figure is one cohesive form made up of flowing and rhythmic lines and shapes similar to these sketches...</p>

<p>http://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5b/63/6b/5b636bcd1714cdcfdb94f29aafe6818b.jpg<br /> http://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d9/86/3a/d9863a74cbadc81805ac0397591b3966.jpg<br /> http://d2918aghi3b457.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/211-red-chalk-study-.jpg</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Like it or not, social attitudes about decency and indecency are probably the biggest elephants in the room where discussions of nudity and sexuality are concerned. I'm not legislating morality here. I'm looking for what is authentically human.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sexual hang ups concerning whether nudes are seen as indecent or artistic is an authentic human aspect of society in general that could be amplified and communicated in a nude photo as an original approach or POV. Creating contrast using line, shape and posture of the nude female figure to distinguish between morals associated with innocence against the grotesque might make for a compelling nude, though I think that's already been done as well.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That Youtube analysis of the female pelvis seems not the way to define eroticism in the female figure and seems more like a confusion between correct anatomy verses posture of the subject which requires seeing the arch of the spine in relation to the legs and upper torso.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I won't try to defend the accuracy of the video, Tim. It was all that I could find at the time. What I have found since indicates that the actual mechanics of the pelvis are a good bit more complicated than can be shown in that kind of display. I cannot vouch for the angles shown in that video, in any case.</p>

<p>The angle of the pelvis certainly is about good posture, but it is more than that. I don't see the need to go any further down that path, unless one genuinely wants to understand how the angle of the pelvis and other variables affects the actual shape and function of parts of the body. Painters and sculptors might conceivably need that kind of understanding in order to recreate the form using chisel or brush. Photographers need only go with what is pleasing to the eye, I suppose.</p>

<p>I had gotten off on that tangent when analyzing the linked photo. Pierre Dumas' comment on the photo on the link on the original post emphasized the slump of the model. I was trying to analyze whether and to what extent that affected how the genitalia were displayed--a tangential consideration, but one that is tied to a number of other issues relating not only to posture pure and simple, but especially to what one might call "sexual posture," that is, how the angles change in differing modeling or sexual positions. I thought that perhaps that might shed some light on how models position or ought to position themselves, but any insight gained would be purely about mechanics, not aesthetics or eroticism--at least not without a great deal more analysis. I sincerely doubt that it would be worth the time for me. I cannot speak for others.</p>

<p>In any case, you are correct in saying that none of that <em>defines</em> eroticism. Nor have I made precisely that claim. Such analyses can only conceivably help to explain how motion or posture can affect display and functioning of the genitalia. They will not determine what is erotic--although I would not want to rule out <em>a priori</em> what might or might not help predict a beautiful or appealing pose. I think that the physiology is quite fascinating, but I do not know what one can prove with that kind of information. Most of all, I do not understand it very well. The pelvis and the shoulders are incredibly complex. A Michelangelo or da Vincis might be able to use such in-depth analysis of the most complex joints. I really would not know what to do with the result of such analysis, even if I did understand it.</p>

<p>If this topic comes up again, I am going to refer people back to this and my earlier post ( Jun 16, 2016; 05:46 p.m. ) on the mechanics of the pelvis. I have nothing more to say about such things, and, if I do dig around and come up with anything, I am going to keep it to myself. One can only expect to be misunderstood when one starts talking or writing about such things.</p>

<p>Were it not for the fact that this thread raised the question of whether <strong><em>anything new might be found</em></strong> in nude photography, I would not even have gone down this path. I won't say that analysis of physiological mechanics cannot or could not be of help in discovering something new on why some nudes are more appealing than others. I simply do not know what on earth one could expect to find, or how to go about it. I won't rule out the possibility that someone brighter and better trained than myself might manage to find something useful at some point in the future.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Like it or not, social attitudes about decency and indecency are probably the biggest elephants in the room where discussions of nudity and sexuality are concerned. I'm not legislating morality here. I'm looking for what is authentically human. --Lannie</p>

<p>Sexual hang ups concerning whether nudes are seen as indecent or artistic is an authentic human aspect of society in general that could be amplified and communicated in a nude photo as an original approach or POV. Creating contrast using line, shape and posture of the nude female figure to distinguish between morals associated with innocence against the grotesque might make for a compelling nude, though I think that's already been done as well. --Tim</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Tim, I don't understand you here at all. </p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<blockquote>

<p>a certain photographer shot nudes of models literally drenched head to toe in honey</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Spencer, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChGxwRq3YcI">THIS SCENE</a> of Ann-Margret from Ken Russell's <em>Tommy</em> isn't quite a nude, but might kill two birds with one stone. It could be a more savory bean and chocolate precursor to your honey example and might also hint at one of the real elephants in this room!</p>

<p>Forgive me, all the pelvis talk got me worked up into a frenzy ;-)</p>

<p>But, back to the point, <em>Tommy</em>, now there was something new.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In any case, you are correct in saying that none of that <em>defines</em> eroticism. Nor have I made precisely that claim. Such analyses can only conceivably help to explain how motion or posture can affect display and functioning of the genitalia.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Lanny, your OP is about finding new ways to depict the nude figure (male or female). You considered the mechanics of anatomy as the underpinnings to eroticism which is a worthy approach to understanding its influences.</p>

<p>The sketches I posted was to show the results of relationship created by these mechanics to show rhythm of line, shape and texture whose aesthetics are changed by the subject's posture, body type, surroundings and lighting of the nude figure which is at the core of eroticism. It is a question of contrasts and how to recognize it in all its various forms such as lights/darks, soft/rough, small/large, etc. It's how photographers and image makers make someone look at something in an image.</p>

<p>Even the genitalia is an element used to provide contrast in directing the viewer. As an example you could have the nude female laying in a backlit bath of green lime jello with the body in a fixed position to emphasize line shape and form with just the pale pinkish face and genitalia exposed to contrast against the green jello. </p>

<p>There are a myriad of ways to depict contrast in any image to make the viewer look and see something new even in eroticism.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Tim, I don't understand you here at all.<br /> --Lannie</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Refer to my previous point about contrast which also encompasses playing against established social mores either through humor or shock. However you define it, it's about making the viewer look at your image. By shapes and forms and/or ideas. Whatever it takes.</p>

<p>Holy crap! Fred's <em>Tommy </em>and Ann Margret wrestling with chocolate, beans and spaghetti beats my green jello for power of suggestive eroticism prize.</p>

<p>I never could watch the entire movie so I'm seeing that for the first time.</p>

<p>Thanks for the link, Fred.</p>

<p>And, of course, there's no reason to limit nude photography to eroticism . . .</p>

<p><a href="http://www.americansuburbx.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/0c9c1c8854e034d8bdcc50a04d939870a7ad5343-Custom-2.jpg">LARRY CLARK</a></p>

<p>Lanny has his fascination with the angle of a woman's pelvis as I have about a woman's gap. I don't know what it is about it that attracts me. I'ld rather look at that than a full nude. Maybe something new in the genre of nudes could be created based on that.</p>

<p>Even a google search knows about this. Here's one that really emphasizes this anatomical wonder ...</p>

<p>http://s14.photobucket.com/user/andynuyen/media/gap.jpg.html</p>

<blockquote>

<p>(male or female)</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <a href="http://static1.squarespace.com/static/555b8fb9e4b013d27c81ea8e/555bada0e4b013d27c82c13e/555df3c4e4b03ac8059617da/1464897008235/Falling_2007_48x72.jpg?format=2500w">MALE</a> (Ryan McGinley)<br>

<br>

<a href="http://static1.squarespace.com/static/555b8fb9e4b013d27c81ea8e/555bada0e4b013d27c82c13e/555dfc85e4b0c1834b5c20f1/1464898117017/RM_lizzy_2002.jpg?format=1500w">FEMALE</a> (McGinley again)</p>

<p>Fred, so those two examples are new ways to depict nudes in the sense they are of subjects who appear accidentally and playfully caught nude as an expression of freedom and innocence. More naturalistic posing as nudes in their own personal space. That's a compelling approach that offers more variety and shooting options.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Lanny has his fascination with the angle of a woman's pelvis as I have about a woman's gap.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Tim, I wouldn't call it a "fascination." I thought that that approach might bear fruit in terms of art.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, those who really do find it fascinating are serving up mostly porn, based on what I am finding. It is actually quite revolting. (I won't provide links! I won't mention the search strings used to find such sites, either.)</p>

<p>I thought naively that one could use an analytical and scientific approach in this area. Unfortunately, the web is not geared toward "analysis" or "science" where nudes are concerned.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And, of course, there's no reason to limit nude photography to eroticism . . .</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Nor "aestheticism," either, Fred. What that link showed isn't pretty or sexy, but it is real.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>A friend just called to say that I should look out toward the north and northwest. Well, what I saw was less impressive than what I felt: sweet, dry Canadian air blowing steadily from the north all the way down here near Charlotte--and no doubt across the state line and on down into South Carolina. This late in June!</p>

<p>Thank God for Canada, and thank God for a refreshing and wholesome alternative to viewing nudes.</p>

<p>Fred, I have to say, however, that some of those Ryan McGinley photos you are posting are just as refreshing--even wholesome and innocent. What a relief!</p>

<p>We all know that "the nude" is not inherently evil or sleazy, but sometimes the web can make one think that it is. I wish that I were up in the mountains right now.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>Maybe the title of the thread should have been this:</p>

<h1>Is there--could there ever be--anything new and <em>refreshing</em> in nude photography?</h1>

<p>--Lannie</p>

Well this could be new:

 

http://images.counselheal.com/data/images/full/6261/total-recall-three-breasts.jpg?w=600

 

but it is getting a bit passe.

<p>Sometimes, when an image is appealing, it is as much the idea as it is what is actually shown:</p>

<p><a href="http://contortion.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Naked-yoga-girl.jpg">[LINK]</a></p>

<p>There is more than one idea here, of course. One is simply the idea of a free and open beach, free of societal restrictions and regulations. Another is a variation on the "nude in nature" theme. Of course, what is shown here is above all the idea inhering in an aging man's fantasy--and probably a younger man's as well.</p>

<p>Is there anything "new" here? Perhaps, but it is yet just another variation on a theme. Perhaps that is all that novelty or "the new" is about at this stage in the history of photography--with the rare exception of the photo that does indeed take one totally by surprise.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p><a href="

is a song that conveys an idea very similar to one of the ideas inhering in the photo just above. Ultimately, that idea is that of loss--the loss that comes with aging.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW7b4xgRBTM"><em>Here</em></a> is yet another song in which the video shows a young Phoebe Cates who might as well be nude, in my opinion. </p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>Even the tried and true can break over us afresh, as in this one by Carney Malone:</p>

<p><a href="/photo/18221937&size=lg">[LINK]</a></p>

<p>Is it new? Well, of course not.</p>

<p>But is it <em>new</em>? Well, of course it is, if it's timeless.</p>

<p>Stephen Haynes' work is in the same tradition:</p>

<p><a href="/photo/760835&size=lg">[LINK]</a></p>

<p>Every wrinkle is in some sense a new wrinkle. Here is another by Carney Malone:</p>

<p><a href="/photo/18232800&size=lg">[LINK]</a></p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<blockquote>

<p>playing the "nude card"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>These latest are traditional, easily anticipated, nudes and do seem to play just that card.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Of course, what is shown here is above all the idea inhering in an aging man's fantasy--</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL. This "idea" may be more true of the last three links than the more obvious one of the older guy with the long, hard pole!</p>

<p>... here is a song:</p>

<p>She wore blue velvet<br>

Bluer than velvet was the night</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>What are you doing in my closet, Jeffrey Beaumont? — <em>Dorothy Vallens</em></p>

<p>When viewers and commentators on nude photography find (new?) words on novel perspectives on nudity maybe, one day, we are able to answer Lannie's question on what is "new in nude photography". Until then we are turning in circles.<br>

<a href="http://media.cleveland.com/rnc-2016/photo/2016/05/11/spencer-tunick-cleveland-shoot-d80c641ebe7b850f.jpg">Spencer </a><a href="https://photogrist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Spencer-Tunick.jpg">Tunick</a> (ref Phil) might be hinting on such new perspectives.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>LOL. This "idea" may be more true of the last three links than the more obvious one of the older guy with the long, hard pole!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fred "the Snake" Goldsmith strikes again. I was warned but went ahead with the thread anyway.</p>

<p><a href="/photo/13882943"><em>Here</em></a> is an old man's fantasy for you--not mine, but somebody's.</p>

<p>Fred, may one of your own fantasies rise up and bite you on your hind leg.</p>

<p>Both hind legs, you satyr!</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>